As with everything in these troubling times, the issue is a partisan one: President Obama came out in favor of strong rules enforcing net neutrality. Therefore Republicans hate it. Ted Cruz called it “Obamacare for the Internet.” Ajit Pai, one of the two GOP commissioners on the FCC, warned that Internet taxes are coming. Sen. John Thun, R-South Dakota, vows to stop these “monopoly-era regulations.”

Of all the issues before us that are needlessly partisan, net neutrality has to be at the forefront. It doesn’t impose a tax on consumers; it doesn’t dictate content on the Internet. All it does is keep the Internet the same level playing field it has been since its inception.

The Associated Press has a great description of what net neutrality means for consumers:

Net neutrality is the idea that websites or videos load at about the same speed. That means you won’t be more inclined to watch a particular show on Amazon Prime instead of on Netflix because Amazon has struck a deal with your service provider to load its data faster.

The Internet has always been a first-come, first-served place when it comes to content. No one had to pay a premium to deliver their content to users ahead of someone else. It’s that kind of environment where startups can thrive (or fail) based on their merits, not because they have to pay a premium just to get in the game.

Furthermore, net neutrality supports the status quo. It’s ISP giants like Comcast and Verizon who want to change the rules, by charging content providers a premium for faster access to consumers. As for Sen. Thune’s crack about “monopoly-era regulations,” it’s worth noting that in many areas across the country, broadband providers are a monopoly. If you don’t want to pay the cable company’s prices for high-speed Internet, good luck finding an alternative that’s just as fast. The days of competitive ISPs went the way of dialup service.

There are those who fear “price controls,” but the FCC has said that rates for Internet access won’t be subject to preapproval. But customers will have an avenue for complaining about unfair costs.

Net neutrality should be a bipartisan issue. Liberals should like it because it preserves the free flow of information (OK, EVERYONE should like that), and conservatives should like it because it allows the free market to flourish online. Government shouldn’t be in the business of throttling the exchange of ideas, but neither should corporations.

As far as the voters are concerned, this is an issue with common ground. A University of Delaware poll in November — AFTER President Obama came out in favor of strong net neutrality rules — showed that 81 percent of Democrats and 85 percent of Republicans oppose Internet “fast lanes.”

Today’s ruling was an encouraging step in preserving an open Internet. But I have faith in our Congressional leaders, and possibly the courts, that they can undo all of this common ground that the voters have on net neutrality.